the future is here

[Rebelnerd]

well is didn't see it so lets not start discussing it.

[xcriteria]

Rebelnerd Wrote:actually some of those camps and juvie prisons are state run, for juvenile offenders. i've heard some of the inmantes there say it's worse than adult prison. and about the whole democracy thing, yes, american citizens have many rights that people in other countries don't. but not us. besides forced schooling, people under 18 can't own property or money, vote, hold political office, sign a contract, and can legally have their parental guardian take their hard earned money and use it for themselves. the fact is, we really don't have any rights. it's just become so common in our society that people barely even notice it anymore.

That is terrible, and those things ought to change. But, there are plenty of things that can be done that don't remotely involve violence; and as I've said, one of the most important things is publicizing the issues.

It's absolutely insane to go around promoting terrorism as a solution for issues that haven't even been widely publicized. As far as I can tell, youth do have free speech rights (outside of school), and can in practice own at least some kinds of property and money. While it's true their parents can disrupt those activities, not all parents do so, and I never had my property confiscated by my parents.

I continue to be shocked how quickly you're jumping to the advocacy of violence! Yes, there are numerous legitimate problems, but having a legitimate complaint -- even a bunch -- does not justify advocating violence. While some would disagree with that, I think it's truly brutish to jump to that point without even seriously asking, "what else can be done?"

Do you think NYRA, which advocates in favor of youth rights on many of the issues you mentioned, supports violence?

No! They use non-violent, legal methods. And, I think the more some people jump to advocating and plotting violence and descruction, the more the work of those who are pushing legitimate and effective methods of changing public opinion is disrupted.

Have you heard the term agent provocateur? A relevant excerpt from that (wikipedia) article is: "Agents provocateurs are also used against political opponents. Here, it has been documented that provocateurs deliberately carry out or seek to incite counter-productive and/or ineffective acts, in order to foster public disdain for the group and provide a pretext for aggression; and to worsen the punishments its members are liable for."

I'm not suggesting you are an agent provacateur, but the same effect is hard to avoid, when somone is basically advocating terrorism in the name of a movement people which increasing numbers of people are working on in a dedicated, passionate and legitimate manner. These issues are far too important for progress on them to be distrupted in this way.

The key here is separating the grievances from the methods used to address those grievances. Why are you so drawn to violence as a solution? How much have you given other methods consideration, or tried talking to the many adults who do care about these issues, or who might be persuaded to?

I would start by separating your personal problems from those that others have. Not everyone actively suffers from the dismal youth rights situation, because for the most part, if parents are cooperative and caring, and things can be discussed, minors have the de facto ability to do quite a lot. For others, the youth rights situation is incredibly damaging.

But a big problem youth have -- in terms of prevalence, maybe the main problem -- is the way they are looked at by adults (and often themselves.) This is the root of the formal social conventions, like rights and educational processes, that end up being established. I think you're sorely mistaken if you think you can intimidate respect out of the population by terrorizing them. The result, almost necessarily, is antagonism and counter-militance, which then tends to spread to the whole movement in question through stereotyping. I'd have to do some research to make a more comprehensive demonstration of that point, but it is unquestionable that non-violent methods have historically had great success, particularly under democracy.

[Rebelnerd]

xcriteria Wrote:Have you heard the term agent provocateur? A relevant excerpt from that (wikipedia) article is: "Agents provocateurs are also used against political opponents. Here, it has been documented that provocateurs deliberately carry out or seek to incite counter-productive and/or ineffective acts, in order to foster public disdain for the group and provide a pretext for aggression; and to worsen the punishments its members are liable for."

I'm not suggesting you are an agent provacateur, but the same effect is hard to avoid, when somone is basically advocating terrorism in the name of a movement people which increasing numbers of people are working on in a dedicated, passionate and legitimate manner. These issues are far too important for progress on them to be distrupted in this way.

what progress? what have they done? you can't negotiate with people who don't consider you people. look, i'm not saying we should just go on a rampage, or even actually use violence. i just think that if we make it so that we are capable of violently defending ourselves, and let them know. it may shake theidea of youth as defenseless, apethetic brats which their entire system is based on. once people atart dying, which they have, then we should consider ALL options.

[Human V. 2.0]

The second you have to pick up the gun, is the same second they will put a bullet in your head.

[Rebelnerd]

no, they will hesitate to harm kids. especially if there's reporters nearby.

[Human V. 2.0]

And morality goes out the window. Sure! We can shoot them, but if there are reporters nearby, they can't shoot back! Yeah, bullshit.
If you put thier lives in danger, chances are, they will end yours.

[Rebelnerd]

and vice versa. that's how a war works.

[Human V. 2.0]

Yeah, but if it's Anarchy Vrs. US, your ass is probably grass.

[Rebelnerd]

not if all the students, workers, everyone but the rich and powerful rebelled. then they would be absolutely unstoppable.

[Human V. 2.0]

And they would rebel...why?
The rich and powerful like the system.

[Rebelnerd]

no, the lower class rebels AGAINST the rich and powerful because all through history they have been enemies.